Catholic Truth Dissolved by Contemporary O.F. Liturgy

  • Thread starter Thread starter marttywinston
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
Meanwile, we went 40 years in the Novus Ordo environment where priests and bishops told everyone that is was wrong to attend the Traditional Latin Mass and no one blinked an eyebrow.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what came to my mind.
 
Guys, your arguments are noted, but this is not an SSPX priest who can say whatever he wants (for the time being, anyway.) FSSP priests are part of the Church and subject to its rules of obedience. The Church has been good to them and their apostolate is growing. The situation with the Extraordinary Form is still delicate, though, and a priest who preaches SSPX-like arguments (in a diocesan church, no less) does way more harm than good.

Just like so-called “progressive” priests who openly call for things like women’s ordination and abortion, this priest needs to be reported. I do agree with trying to talk with him first, if only to inform him what’s going on.
 
A priest certainly has the authority to tell us we should avoid Masses which contain extensive liturgical abuses. But a priest does not have the authority to declare that things which are explicitly permitted by the Church, such as celebrating versus populum or in the vernacular, are liturgical abuses.
 
marttywinston said:
My wife and I attended Mass in the Extraordinary Form today, said by a priest of the Fraternity of St. Peter. The priest, in his sermon, said that we should not attend what he called the Novus Ordo because of the extensive liturgical abuses. By this he meant things like the priest facing the congregation, lots of communion ministers, the vernacular–all the changes made after Vatican II but not called for specifically by the council. He said that people go to great lengths to avoid catching the flu, they should be even more careful to avoid losing their faith and therefore should avoid the N.O. I don’t know what to think. For one thing, by his measure, there is no where else to attend Mass within hundreds of miles except his Mass. What about evangelization? By his measure, we should only evangelize to the E.F. It doesn’t seem right, but I can’t verbalize why. Would you please help me to clarify my thoughts? Thank you and God bless you.
Click to expand...
What I find sad is that a Catholic priest would use the pulpit to cause more division in the Church by confusing the faithful even more. It isn’t the fault of the Novus Ordo that has caused extensive liturgical abuse. It is the fault of a lack of not only respect but poor theological training in seminaries which turn out whacko priests who insist on changing the liturgy to suit themselves and the radicals who control them. It is also the fault of the bishops who could, in one fell swoop, end the abuses immediately. And this priest should know better because he belongs to a confraternity initiated by Pope John Paul II. It sounds as if he has had some poor theological training himself. Is there ever a middle point?
 
I would simply say that if someone says something moronic he should be given the benefit of the doubt and he should be asked to verify if our understanding is correct or not. Once we verify we correct them with charity and clarity, if it does not work we get a witness and then we bring it up to the Church.
I think that the FSSP priests are serious about their obedience to the Pope. That is the central point of the society, EF and obedience. I think that the priest deserves the right to be heard again before and other action.
I would ignore all the other moronic comments from schismatics that just want to bring further division into the Church.
 
peary1 said:
What I find sad is that a Catholic priest would use the pulpit to cause more division in the Church by confusing the faithful even more. It isn’t the fault of the Novus Ordo that has caused extensive liturgical abuse. It is the fault of a lack of not only respect but poor theological training in seminaries which turn out whacko priests who insist on changing the liturgy to suit themselves and the radicals who control them. It is also the fault of the bishops who could, in one fell swoop, end the abuses immediately. And this priest should know better because he belongs to a confraternity initiated by Pope John Paul II. It sounds as if he has had some poor theological training himself. Is there ever a middle point?
Click to expand...
In matters of faith there can be NO shades of gray!!!
 
peary1 said:
What I find sad is that a Catholic priest would use the pulpit to cause more division in the Church by confusing the faithful even more. It isn’t the fault of the Novus Ordo that has caused extensive liturgical abuse. It is the fault of a lack of not only respect but poor theological training in seminaries which turn out whacko priests who insist on changing the liturgy to suit themselves and the radicals who control them. It is also the fault of the bishops who could, in one fell swoop, end the abuses immediately.
Click to expand...
The first point is that from what the O/P said, the Priest refrained from blaming the N.O. per se, but only said it should be avoided because of the abuses. And regardless of whose fault it is (bad Priest, negligent Bishops, or negligent Popes) the fact is that no one who has the authority to stop the abuses has done so… and who suffers as a result? The faithful. The faithful suffer as a result of the negligence of the Pope and Bishops whose job it is to protect the integrity of the faith and liturgy. When they fail in their duty, it is the faithful who suffer…

The FSSP Priest, on the other hand, is not failing in his duty. He has enough care for the souls under his charge to warn them of the dangers threatening their faith, such as attending Masses with the abuses he metioned. And since such abuses only take place at the Novus Ordo, he rightly told them to avoid it. Wouldn’t it be nice if the Bishops had this much concern for both the faithful and the liturgy. Until that day arrives, we can be thankful for Priests like the one from the FSSP who has the courage to say what needs to be said.
 
peary1 said:
What I find sad is that a Catholic priest would use the pulpit to cause more division in the Church by confusing the faithful even more. It isn’t the fault of the Novus Ordo that has caused extensive liturgical abuse. It is the fault of a lack of not only respect but poor theological training in seminaries which turn out whacko priests who insist on changing the liturgy to suit themselves and the radicals who control them. It is also the fault of the bishops who could, in one fell swoop, end the abuses immediately. And this priest should know better because he belongs to a confraternity initiated by Pope John Paul II. It sounds as if he has had some poor theological training himself. Is there ever a middle point?
Click to expand...
Hi peary1. Thanks for the response last night about the 'hippie" heretic nun running a retreat house. And yes there are still some 60’s to prresent “hippie” priests and bishops in Novus Ordo Masses that just won’t give up and obey The Vatican. Like “Crack Theologians” think they override The Holy See.
 
The priest’s advice sounds similar to Fr. Ripperger (FSSP) below.

www.sensustraditionis.org/webaudio/Sermons/Disk8/Challenge.mp3

There he challenges Catholics to attend the TLM exclusively for two months.

There is nothing wrong in advocating this as there is no obligation to attend the NO if there is a TLM available.

As for abuses, many NO parishes’ use of EM’s IS an abuse. The permission to use lay Eucharistic ministers was specifically limited to exceptional circumstances. Today in most suburban NO parishes armies of EM’s are used as standard practice. This is an abuse.
 
Ultima_Ratio said:
The first point is that from what the O/P said, the Priest refrained from blaming the N.O. per se, but only said it should be avoided because of the abuses.

That is ridiculous. Most Novus Ordo Masses are done correctly. It might be somewhat bland, but they follow the proper structure of the liturgy. He has no business telling the faithful to avoid a legitimate form of worship.

And regardless of whose fault it is (bad Priest, negligent Bishops, or negligent Popes) the fact is that no one who has the authority to stop the abuses has done so… and who suffers as a result? The faithful. The faithful suffer as a result of the negligence of the Pope and Bishops whose job it is to protect the integrity of the faith and liturgy. When they fail in their duty, it is the faithful who suffer…

Then, as in the past, it is up to the Faithful not only to expect but to DEMAND of both their bishops and priests to do things the way they are supposed to be done. And there is also the collection plate…

The FSSP Priest, on the other hand, is not failing in his duty. He has enough care for the souls under his charge to warn them of the dangers threatening their faith, such as attending Masses with the abuses he metioned. And since such abuses only take place at the Novus Ordo, he rightly told them to avoid it. Wouldn’t it be nice if the Bishops had this much concern for both the faithful and the liturgy. Until that day arrives, we can be thankful for Priests like the one from the FSSP who has the courage to say what needs to be said.

**He went beyond his teaching responsibilities, as far as I am concerned. The only other ‘choice’ for the faithful is NOT to attend ANY Mass except, of course, if its the EF. And that could be a hundred miles away. To expect people to travel that far is ridiculous. **
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the MP3, Lamentabili, very interesting!

D’you think after 2 months attending TLM, I would no longer attend the NO? :confused:
I feel torn between both masses, because the Pope agrees with both, and I wouldn’t give up one for the other.
 
Bebekoualy said:
Thanks for the MP3, Lamentabili, very interesting!

D’you think after 2 months attending TLM, I would no longer attend the NO? :confused:
I feel torn between both masses, because the Pope agrees with both, and I wouldn’t give up one for the other.
Click to expand...
Speaking for myself. I was drawn to the TLM right from the beginning, but I stayed with the parish where I went through RCIA. It was closer and convenient, and the mass there was conservative and solid. Towards the middle of this past summer there was a shakeup and both our pastor and PV left at once. During this time we started going to the TLM every week. When we went back to our old parish, we could barely sit through the mass at all for all the goofiness that was apparent. Just one example; the new pastor, while a very nice man and very sincere in his beliefs, could not restrain himself from ad-libbing the words of the consecration. We also went to a mass in another parish where the baby-boomer hippie priest said a mass that might as well be an amalgamation of all the “Spirit of Vatican II” stereotypes of the past 40 years. By mid-fall we’d changed our parish affiliation to the FSSP. We realize how blessed we are to have them so close by.
 
peary1 said:
The subject is the Liturgy.
Click to expand...
Can you really separate the two? I love my faith but the liturgy of the NO as it is widely done around here makes it oh so hard for me to practice it! Too many distractions and too many irreverances to see! I’m getting tired of sitting through the NO with my eyes closed so I can concentrate on the basics(Gospel, Sermon, Eucharist).
 
Bebe,

There’s only one way to find out. Take the challenge! 😉

As for the OF, I don’t think you have to worry about hurting the Pope’s feelings by not going. The Pope has criticized it in the past even going so far as to call it a “banal on the spot product” as a Cardinal. And he was talking about the Latin promulgated version. The NO is a valid form of Mass, however rarely can one find a Mass of Paul VI done in the manner which VCII forsaw (Latin, Gregorian Chant, ad orientam, etc.). Most NO Masses on the ground level are ICEL Masses which include a very poor translation and add in elements nowhere called for by VCII (EM’s, folk/ rock music, holding hands, altar girls, priest facing people, communion in the hand) plus who knows what other innovations.

The great thing about the TLM is that it has stood the test of time, produced countless Saints, and you know what to expect every time. You can’t go wrong.
 
Lamentabili said:
Bebe,

There’s only one way to find out. Take the challenge! 😉

As for the OF, I don’t think you have to worry about hurting the Pope’s feelings by not going. The Pope has criticized it in the past even going so far as to call it a “banal on the spot product” as a Cardinal. And he was talking about the Latin promulgated version. The NO is a valid form of Mass, however rarely can one find a Mass of Paul VI done in the manner which VCII forsaw (Latin, Gregorian Chant, ad orientam, etc.). Most NO Masses on the ground level are ICEL Masses which include a very poor translation and add in elements nowhere called for by VCII (EM’s, folk/ rock music, holding hands, altar girls, priest facing people, communion in the hand) plus who knows what other innovations.

The great thing about the TLM is that it has stood the test of time, produced countless Saints, and you know what to expect every time. You can’t go wrong.
Click to expand...
AMEN!!!
 
bpbasilphx said:
Maybe I’m wrong, but my understanding is that while FSSP is dedicated to the celebration of the Extraordinary Form, this society will celebrate in the Ordinary Form in Latin or the vernacular, according to the norms preferred by Benedict XVI.

And I have been told that the OF was even celebrated at Encône during the palmy days of Abp. Marcel!
Click to expand...
Not sure where Encône is, but the Novus Ordo Missae was never celebrted at Econe.
 
This is a great thread! I agree with everyone who suggests that this priest should be reported to his superior, to the bishop, to Ecclesia Dei, and the Vatican. He is obviously ill-formed and needs some reintegration training since he doesn’t follow the Pope.
 
Let me give you my background. Our home parish for the last six years has had two priests, a diocesan and an FSSP. My wife is “attached” to the EF. I go most Sundays to the Latin Mass with my wife. Up until last year I loved the EF. Last year, the FSSP priest assigned here changed. This new priest’s preaching started out and has been increasingly (in my mind) offensive. As many in this forum have said about the OF, it has been an exercise in self-control for me to attend.
I listened to Fr. Ripperger. His argument doesn’t convince me. He’s talking about affection. I like both Masses. At our English Mass, people sing and say the responses enthusiastically and loudly. When you are “sent forth” you feel excited. It’s not perfect. In my opinion it could be improved. At the EF Mass, the choir does a beautiful job. But basically except for the ordinary time responses like the asperges and the creed, most people cannot or do not sing along with the chant or polyphony.
I thank you for the discussion. I’ve decided to send a letter to Father.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top